Re: Concurrent MERGE

From: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Concurrent MERGE
Date: 2010-08-05 17:36:32
Message-ID: 4C5AF6A0.1060005@agliodbs.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


> At 2010 Dev Mtg, we put me down to work on making merge work
> concurrently. That was garbled slightly and had me down as working on
> predicate locking which is the general solution to the problem.

Well, we *still* want predicate locking regardless of what MERGE
supports. It's useful in about 9 different ways.

--
-- Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL Experts Inc.
http://www.pgexperts.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kevin Grittner 2010-08-05 17:40:21 Re: Concurrent MERGE
Previous Message Chris Browne 2010-08-05 17:35:23 Re: Two different methods of sneaking non-immutable data into an index